The Canadian Alliance had forced a debate on the government's decision not to go to war in Iraq, and the Liberals were there to make sure the Alliance motion was defeated.
Liberal MPs David Pratt and David Price stayed outside the House, uncomfortable with the government's position but unwilling to vote against it. When they returned, to jeers from the opposition, Jean Chrétien grinned from his seat. "Some lame duck," he said, loudly enough for Alliance MPs to hear.
Can there be anyone in Ottawa more self-satisfied than Mr. Chrétien? Seven months ago, he was a humiliated prime minister, compelled by his own rebellious caucus to announce his eventual departure.
Four months ago, he appeared to have lost the confidence of Liberal MPs in the House of Commons. They had forced him to surrender control over the appointing of parliamentary committee chairs. They had objected to campaign finance reform so strenuously that the government had delayed introducing the legislation. Many Liberal MPs were as angry over the cost escalations of the gun registry as any opposition MPs. And the Prime Minister had been forced to cut loose one of his few, and most valued, allies, Solicitor-General Lawrence MacAulay, as well as his press secretary, for making a disparaging remark about President George W. Bush.
But, by any measure, Mr. Chrétien has made a remarkable comeback. That campaign finance reform legislation is being pushed through, despite howls from the back bench. On Tuesday, Mr. Chrétien and House Leader Don Boudria strong-armed caucus into voting increased appropriations for the gun registry, although several Liberal MPs abstained or failed to show up for the vote. There have been no fresh scandals or revelations through the winter to derail the government agenda.
And now the Prime Minister has managed what is, by his own lights and those of most Canadians, a foreign policy triumph. Remember, Mr. Chrétien took office in 1993 promising to dismember the newly negotiated North American free-trade agreement. Instead, faced with economic and political realities, he meekly signed the treaty. Ten years later, he is finally able to right the balance, by refusing to participate in the Iraq war.
Mr. Chrétien wanted to stand aside on Iraq for both intellectual and visceral reasons. Viscerally, he shares the distrust of many Quebeckers for the English nations' -- and English Canadians' -- penchant for foreign adventures, be they in Europe in the last century or the Middle East today.
The reasoned expression of that gut suspicion came in the Liberal government's sudden embrace of multilateralism. Indeed, we should be calling it the Chrétien Doctrine, which states that Canada will only contribute to those international initiatives in which a clear majority of the major nations are in agreement.
The Chretien Doctrine is, in the minds of many, an appalling policy, for it places the United States on exactly the same plane with Russia, China and France and, in fact, surrenders our sovereignty -- not to Washington, but to Moscow, Beijing and Paris.
But for Mr. Chrétien, it's worth the risk of estranging our giant partner on the continent; he gets to realign Canadian foreign policy closer to the stance taken by Pierre Trudeau and Lester Pearson, to the thunderous approval of most Canadians. And now Liberal MPs, senators and cabinet ministers revile Mr. Bush with impunity.
There is still unfinished business for this government: The legislation to decriminalize marijuana was to have been put before the House by now, but it has been held up by delays at the Health Department in delivering an accompanying anti-drug strategy.
The earliest the bill could be introduced is late April or early May. To avoid reoffending the Americans, if the war in Iraq is still going on then, the legislation will be delayed further. The chances of this bill becoming law by the end of June, when Parliament adjourns for the summer, dwindle with each passing day.
But, then, maybe June isn't the final deadline. Everyone assumes that, as the Liberal leadership race enters its final laps after Labour Day, and the Prime Minister's days grow shorter, there will be less and less coming out of the government, making the fall sitting of Parliament a lame-duck one.
But lame ducks still quack. And this Prime Minister is visibly enjoying himself, striking fear into his enemies while basking in the adulation of the public. Who would put it past him to keep his legacy legislation flowing until the very last day?
John Ibbitson